Literature DB >> 8080680

Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal patients with tumours considered too large for breast conserving surgery: preliminary results of a randomised trial: S6.

S M Scholl1, A Fourquet, B Asselain, J Y Pierga, J R Vilcoq, J C Durand, T Dorval, T Palangié, M Jouve, P Beuzeboc.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess a potential advantage in survival by neoadjuvant as compared to adjuvant chemotherapy. 414 premenopausal patients with T2-T3 N0-N1 M0 breast cancer were randomised to receive either four cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, 5-fluorouracil), followed by local-regional treatment (group I) or four cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy after primary irradiation +/- surgery (group II). Surgery was limited to those patients with a persisting mass after irradiation, and aimed to be as conservative as possible. 390 patients were evaluable. With a median follow-up of 54 months, we observed a statistically significant difference (P = 0.039) in survival in favour of the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group. A similar trend was seen when the time to metastatic recurrence was evaluated (P = 0.09). At this stage, no difference in disease-free interval or local recurrence between these two groups could be observed. The mean total dose of chemotherapy administered was similar in both groups. On average, group I had more intensive chemotherapy regimes (doxorubicin P = 0.02) but fewer treatment courses (P = 0.008) as compared to the treated patients in group II. Haematological tolerance was reduced when chemotherapy succeeded to exclusive irradiation. Breast conservation was identical for both groups at the end of primary treatment (82 and 77% for groups I and II, respectively). Of the 191 evaluable patients in the neoadjuvant treatment arm, 65% had an objective response (> 50% regression) following four cycles of chemotherapy. The objective response rate to primary irradiation (55 Gy) was 85%. Improved survival figures in the neoadjuvant treatment arm could be the result of the early initiation of chemotherapy, but we cannot exclude that this difference might be attributable to a slightly more aggressive treatment. So far, the trend in favour of decreased metastases was not statistically significant. The local control appeared similar in both subgroups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8080680     DOI: 10.1016/0959-8049(94)90537-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  55 in total

1.  Quantitative assessment Ki-67 score for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer.

Authors:  Jason R Brown; Michael P DiGiovanna; Brigid Killelea; Donald R Lannin; David L Rimm
Journal:  Lab Invest       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 5.662

2.  Does induction chemotherapy with a mitoxantrone/vinorelbine regimen allow a breast-conservative treatment in patients with operable locoregional breast cancer? A French Northern Oncology Group trial in 105 patients. French Northern Oncology Group.

Authors:  A Adenis; L Vanlemmens; C Fournier; B Hecquet; J Bonneterre
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Response monitoring of breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy using quantitative ultrasound, texture, and molecular features.

Authors:  Lakshmanan Sannachi; Mehrdad Gangeh; Hadi Tadayyon; Ali Sadeghi-Naini; Sonal Gandhi; Frances C Wright; Elzbieta Slodkowska; Belinda Curpen; William Tran; Gregory J Czarnota
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  A dose-dense schedule of docetaxel followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as neoadjuvant treatment for breast cancer: results from a phase II study.

Authors:  Silvia Antolín; Ramón Mel; Manuel Ramos; Andrés García-Palomo; Concepción Almanza; Laura de Paz; Lourdes Calvo; Elena Alvarez; Ana González; Jesús García-Mata
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.405

5.  Neo-Bioscore in Guiding Post-surgical Therapy in Patients With Triple-negative Breast Cancer Who Received Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

Authors:  Yoriko Hasegawa; Nobuaki Matsubara; Takahiro Kogawa; Yoichi Naito; Kenichi Harano; Ako Hosono; Tatsuya Onishi; Takashi Hojo; Mototsugu Shimokawa; Toru Mukohara
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2021 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.155

6.  Primary chemotherapy with doxorubicin and paclitaxel in patients with early breast cancer: final results of a multicenter phase II study.

Authors:  P Schmid; J Krocker; G Morack; V Heilmann; J-U Blohmer; K Michniewicz; G Köhler; T Schaller-Kranz; K Possinger; D Elling
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-08-20       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 7.  Management of patients with locally advanced breast cancer.

Authors:  Lisa A Newman
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.075

8.  Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage II-III triple negative breast cancer on eligibility for breast-conserving surgery and breast conservation rates: surgical results from CALGB 40603 (Alliance).

Authors:  Mehra Golshan; Constance T Cirrincione; William M Sikov; Donald A Berry; Sara Jasinski; Tracey F Weisberg; George Somlo; Clifford Hudis; Eric Winer; David W Ollila
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 9.  Breast cancer (non-metastatic).

Authors:  Justin Stebbing; Geoff Delaney; Alistair Thompson
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2007-12-04

10.  Neoadjuvant docetaxel for operable breast cancer induces a high pathological response and breast-conservation rate.

Authors:  S Amat; P Bougnoux; F Penault-Llorca; F Fétissof; H Curé; F Kwiatkowski; J-L Achard; G Body; J Dauplat; P Chollet
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2003-05-06       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.